Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-08-14
TVTTLE'S VALUATION.
The Price of Egis Goodwin While
Commanders at NatcheZ.

a st. Louis special says : The people
who are opposed to Tuttleism are con-
tinuing their investigation of that war.
rior's methods, and the latest " find y
was raked up in Iowa court RI cords In
September, 1876, Hickey & Co., of
Natchez, filed suit in the Leo County
0owa) Circuit Court at Madison for
the recovery of 81, 800 from James NJ.
futile. Their case was set forth in the
following record:
Plaintiffs, a partnership and firm by
the name of hickey e. Co., represent
that on or about the year 1864 they
were engaged in the hotel, restaurant,
and LIQUOR trade business in the city OF
Natchez, in the State OF Mississippi,
and defendant was at that time gene
raj in the army of the United States,
and commander of q military depart
mont, with his headquarters and resi-
dence at said city of Natchez ; and that
while plaintiffs were thus engaged in
their said business at said city OF Nat
chez. said defendant, being there and
their military commander as aforesaid,
demanded and received from plaintiffs
the sum of 81, 500 as a consideration
for his good will and permission, by
him granted to plaintiffs, to allow and
permit them to continue in and carry
on their said business as above stated
at said city of Natchez, and with the
understanding that unless said money
WAS paid he would exercise his military
power and authority to compel them to
suspend their said business and plain
tiffs aver that they paid defendant said
money unwillingly and by compulsion OF
defendant, and that he demanded said
money from them and converted the
same to his own personal and private
use, in violation of the rights OF plant
ifs and the law of the land ;and'plaint-
ifs show and claim that said money
thus unjustly and illegally taken and
received from plaintiffs was and is sub
iect in law to draw interest from the
date defendant received said money at
the rate of per cent. per annum, and
which interest amounts to the sum OF
81, 500; and plaintiffs claim Judgment
for said principal of 81, 800 and $1,000
interest, amounting IN all to 81, 800 and
costs.
Tuttle's answer was as follows:
In the District Court Of Lee county,
Iowa, December term, 1876. Demur-
rer.-And now comes defendant, j..
NJ. futile, and files this his demurrer
to the petition Of plaintiff filed herein,
and for cau.e OF such demurrer states
first, because said petition shows on its
face that the claim sued upon is barred
by the Statute of Limitations be-
cause said petition shows on its face
that more then five years have elapsed
since said cause of action occurred.
and that the same is barred by the
Statute of Limitations.
And be it further remembered that
after said futile had filed his plea OF
the Statute of Limitations-to wit, on
the 18th day Of December, 1S76-said
plaintiffs filed writing dismissing their
said suit in words and figures as fol-
lows:
Hickey & Co. against j. NJ. futile,
defendant. Now come plaintiffs and
say that whereas said j. NJ. futile has
pleaded the Statute OF Limitations, which
is a good plea in law, and thereby pre-
vents an investigation OF the merits OF
plaintiffs CLAIM. and to avoid further
costs where said Statute Of Limitations
and not Justice is bar to this action,
they, therefore, dismiss the proceeding
without prejudice to their rights to sue
in another State (f the opportunity
may occur where the Statute OF Limita-
tons may not be available as defence
for debt.
hickey & Co. were mulcted for costs.